In 2016, Lord Justice Briggs set out his proposals for restructuring the civil courts and tribunals in England and Wales. The vision for modernising court services and creating the “Online Court” has seen the introduction of online platforms for civil claims in recent years but progress has been described as slow.
Please note: the information contained in this legal update is correct as of the original date of publication.
In 2016, Lord Justice Briggs set out his proposals for restructuring the civil courts and tribunals in England and Wales. The vision for modernising court services and creating the “Online Court” has seen the introduction of online platforms for civil claims in recent years but progress has been described as slow.
The online portal for Part 7 money claims has been in operation since 2002 offering a simplified and accessible system for litigants to issue straightforward claims for a specified sum. This development appears to have been the first real step in attempting to modernise court services well ahead of the 2016 proposals.
Despite being described as outdated, parties continue to issue and respond to claims through MCOL. It is limited to money claims for a fixed value of less than £100,000 and subject to other conditions which are set out at Practice Direction 7(E) of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR).
MCOL has arguably offered wider access to justice during the Covid-19 pandemic where it has otherwise been restricted. Court closures and reduced resources may well have caused significant delays in issuing claims, generating a greater backlog of disputes and potentially resulting in missed limitation dates.
MCOL does, however, highlight the importance of getting the technology right to ensure the success of the digitisation of civil claims and the Online Court. 10 years later, MCOL continues to experience issues with functionality and it is arguable that the online portal over-simplifies the court processes. By way of example, the online portal restricts the level of detail that can be included within the Claimant’s Particulars of Claim. As a result, claims are not being properly pleaded. Separately, MCOL does not fully recognise the parties’ ability to agree extensions of time to court deadlines. Glitches in the system have resulted in adverse orders being made in error (e.g. default judgments) which are costly and time consuming for the parties to try to resolve.
MCOL may well become redundant subject to the success of other future online claims processes being rolled out.
In 2017, the OCMC Pilot was introduced for unrepresented Claimants to issue Part 7 money claims of up to the value of £10,000 that would otherwise be made through MCOL. The pilot is governed by CPR PD 51R and is set to end later this year. It has been described as currently the nearest thing to the Online Court. Progress has seen the pilot open up to professionals and there are future plans to develop the OCMC to increase the current small claims limit from £10,000 to £25,000.
Unlike MCOL, this online platform is set to provide an end-to-end digital service for users through which cases can be progressed and determined. In response to Covid-19, the 119th Practice Direction update granted judges within the OCMC the jurisdiction to review online Directions Questionnaires and make directions irrespective of the value of the claim. This development was expedited in support of the Covid-19 effort. Despite some progress, if the parties are unable to reach a settlement through the online process, determination of the claim would currently revert to the traditional in-person hearing. There are proposals for determination on digital papers or by virtual hearings. Whether the move to virtual hearings owing to COVID-19 has expedited those proposals remains to be seen.
A separate pilot for Claimants legally represented also started in 2017 and is set to end later this year. The CCO pilot is governed by CPR PD 51S and is being rolled out to test a procedure enabling legal representatives to issue claims in the County Court for a specified or unspecified sum of money.
Initially the pilot was by invitation only, however it was opened up to all legal professionals in response to Covid-19. The digital service was also extended to Part 7 personal injury claims in response to the pandemic.
At this stage, the CCO pilot appears to be limited in functionality with provision to file and issue claims. The process then continues on paper in the usual way.
In response to the Covid-19 pandemic, the civil justice system in England and Wales has been forced to rapidly adapt to the new way of online working, necessitating a significant investment in technology to enable the function of court services to continue.
Progress was being made in digitising the civil justice system and creating the Online Court prior to the pandemic. The above mentioned pilot schemes are now in their final year, subject to any further extensions but still appear to be in the early stages of development. Covid-19 has seemingly accelerated the programme to digitise civil claims processes however, it has been suggested that the Online Court should be treated as distinct from the virtual alternatives to physical courts triggered by the pandemic. There is an argument that they cannot be treated distinctly to deal with those claims which are incapable of resolution through the online process or otherwise require disposal in the usual court forum, at least for the immediate future.
Government and devolved administrations have now released roadmaps to exiting lockdown which is hoped to allow the UK to resume business as usual. Covid-19 continues to forcibly modernise and streamline court processes. Claims are increasingly being issued online and hearings continue to take place remotely by way of telephone and video. In a bid to recover from the impact of the pandemic, the civil justice system could revert to the traditional way of working. Conversely, there is wide recognition for the importance of reform and modernisation of court services.
The recent rapid acceleration of technology led court services will hopefully serve to improve the civil justice system in England and Wales however, there is still a long way to go. The key is getting the transition right.
Settlement agreements are commonplace in an employment context and are ordinarily used to provide the parties to the agreement with certainty following the conclusion of an employment relationship. There are already restrictions on the extent to which personal injury claims can be settled by a settlement agreement. There have also been numerous consultations about the use of non-disclosure agreements and confidentiality clauses, particularly where allegations of sexual harassment and discrimination have been raised. In any event, it is clear that settlement agreements should not be used to prevent an employee from raising a protected disclosure.
Claims arising from interest-only mortgages have been farmed in volume. Many such claims to date have sought to drive a narrative that interest-only mortgages are an inherently toxic product and brokers were negligent simply for suggesting them. Taylor is a helpful recalibration, focussing instead on what the monies raised by the mortgage product were being used for and whether the client understood the inherent risks.
In an effort to build a stronger justice system, a shift in priorities has emerged away from adversarial court battles and more towards opportunities for consensual resolution. As one of the most popular forms of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), mediation has become increasingly encouraged.
In a judgment handed down yesterday the Supreme Court has affirmed that a so called “creditor duty” exists for directors such that in some circumstances company directors are required to act in accordance with, or to consider the interests of creditors. Those circumstances potentially arise when a company is insolvent or where there is a “probability” of an insolvency. We explore below the “trigger” for such a test to apply and its implications.
Created at the end of the Brexit transition period, Retained EU Law is a category of domestic law that consists of EU-derived legislation retained in our domestic legal framework by the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. This was never intended to be a permanent arrangement as parliament promised to deal with retained EU law through the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill (the “Bill”).
Practice Direction 57AC (“PD57AC”) relates to witness evidence in trials and explicitly applies only to the Business and Property Courts. It applies to existing proceedings in which the witness statements for trial are signed on or after 6 April 2021.
The Supreme Court has unanimously dismissed the BTI v Sequana appeal and reviewed the existence, content and engagement of the so-called ‘creditor duty’; being the point at which the interest of creditors is said to intrude upon the decision-making of directors of companies in financial distress.
The increased use of artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionising the way businesses operate and is having a disruptive impact in sectors that have traditionally been slow to modernise.
In November 2021, The Civil Justice Council’s published its interim report on proposed changes to the current Pre-Action Protocols, which included a mandatory Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) gateway. In this article, we look at proposed reforms and consider what this could mean for your case.
Janice Walsh applied for a job with Domino’s Pizza, hoping to secure a role as a Delivery Driver. However things quickly took a turn for the worse during her initial interview, with the very first question that she was asked relating to her age. Ms Walsh was ultimately informed that she had not been successful in her application.
The Court of Appeal has dismissed two cases regarding rent arrears accrued during the Covid lockdowns. The cases are London Trocadero (2015) LLP v Picturehouse Cinemas Ltd and Bank of New York Mellon (International) Ltd v Cine-UK Ltd.
In the recent case of Dwyer (UK Franchising) Limited v Fredbar Limited and ano’r [2022] EWCA Civ 889, the Court of Appeal considered the reasonableness of restrictive covenants in a franchise agreement.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) decision in the case of Warburton v The Chief Constable.
Restrictive covenants are widely recognised as a complex area of employment law that is of key importance to many organisations. However more recently, they have become a hot topic with the Government launching their consultation.
In Nissan v Passi, the High Court recently considered the issue of an employee retaining confidential documents belonging to his former employer in the context of the employer’s application for an injunction seeking the return of such documents from the employee.
We regularly encounter disputes relating to Service Level Agreement provisions - here we provide four top tips that you can use to minimise disputes.
We were delighted to be joined by Dr Nigel Sturrock, Regional Medical Director for the Midlands at NHS England and NHS Improvement. He gave an overview of the pressures placed on the NHS by the pandemic, including the impact on urgent and emergency care, elective procedures and staffing.
Schools will need to comply with the requirements of the PAPDC or potentially face financial consequences. This article provides an overview of the PAPDC and explains how it applies to schools.
Following on from our recent article on the release of the updated Code of Practice for dealing with commercial rent arrears that have accrued throughout the pandemic, we continue to highlight what the overall principles seek to ensure - fairness and proportionality for both landlords and tenants across each step of the arbitration process.
The Supreme Court has unanimously overturned the Court of Appeal’s 2019 decision in the case Lloyd (Respondent) v Google LLC (Appellant) which allowed the claimant, Mr Lloyd, to serve a representative action on Google on behalf of over four million iPhone users who were seeking damages for ‘loss of control’ of personal data.
It is an unfortunate reality that many local authorities face historical abuse claims, and often held vicariously liable for abuse by their former employees. We set out an overview of recoveries law and insight into successes we have had in recouping money for local authorities.
The ‘new normal’ has brought with it a variety of different challenges and it has had an impact on nearly all facets of our lives, including the termination of contracts during these Covid-19 times.
The PAPDC does not apply to business to business debt only if the debtor is a sole trader. Much more information is required under the PAPDC within a letter of claim and debtors should be given more time to respond along with an opportunity to make payment proposals throughout the pre-action process.
For business disputes, it looks likely that remote hearings will be an option into the future.
The recent decision of the Supreme Court in Triple Point Technology, Inc. v PTT Public Company Ltd [2021] UKSC 29 has brought long-awaited clarity to the proper approach to the interpretation and application of liquidated damages clauses where works under a contract are delayed and the contract is terminated before the works are completed.
The Supreme Court’s pending decision could potentially open the floodgates for data privacy litigation going forward.
A number of interesting developments have emerged from what was quite a run-of-the-mill insolvency application brought by a litigation funder assignee.
The Technology and Construction Court has recently handed down judgment in a complex and high value claim brought by the Co-op’s insurance arm (CIS) against IBM following the termination of a contract for a new IT system.
The Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2021 (‘the CPAR 2021’) introduces a new Civil Procedure Rule 36.5(5) to clarify the issue of interest after the expiry of Part 36 offers.
From 26 March 2021 the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (Coronavirus) (Extension of the Relevant Period) Regulations 2021 will come into force with the effect of extending several of the temporary measures brought in by the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA).
In this training video participants and their organisations will be starting to look beyond the immediate impact of Covid-19, now planning for the future of litigation including child abuse litigation.
The Ministry of Justice has recently released its civil justice statistics for the period October to December 2020. These statistics show an overall significant downward trend in claim activity compared to pre-Covid times.
What are the key changes to Practice Direction 57AC and Statement of Best Practice, and what are the challenges for legal representatives?
In 2016, Lord Justice Briggs set out his proposals for restructuring the civil courts and tribunals in England and Wales. The vision for modernising court services and creating the “Online Court” has seen the introduction of online platforms for civil claims in recent years but progress has been described as slow.
This claim addressed the question, of when the date for assessment of damages in cases of negligence should be determined and shows that when appropriate the Courts will depart from the default position.
This judgment is critical reading for public bodies who need to take action to restrain the use of confidential information in circumstances where that information has been inadvertently disclosed to a third party.
Part 36 offers in litigation are used tactically to make a settlement offer while simultaneously placing the other side on risk of not ‘beating’ that offer at trial.
The Debt Respite Scheme (Breathing Space Moratorium and Mental Health Crisis Moratorium) (England and Wales) Regulations 2020 is due to come into force on 4 May 2021. It’s a snappy title but what exactly is it?
Insights were shared on procedure, witness statements, withdrawing admissions and taking screenshots and photos in remote hearings.
The importance of Trusts developing a written plan so that you are ready to act quickly if anti-Covid or anti-vaccination protesters come on to your site to protest.
